Week 30: Up In The North
Week 30: Up In The North
Making my way through the Lofoten Islands and up to Tromsø in northern Norway
I’m currently up in the northern Norwegian city of Tromsø. Given that Iceland falls just outside the Arctic Circle this is my first visit to the geographic region. I’ve made my way up to Tromsø via the town of Bodø and the Lofoten Islands. These islands – which look more like a peninsula until you zoom in – are utterly spectacular with their steep inclines and sharp peaks that rise straight out of the ocean, as well as the delightful small fishing villages that dot through the coastline. Although I suspect tourism has long since replaced fishing as the region’s primary source of revenue.
The region is also surprisingly warm given its latitude. The North Atlantic current enables the islands to have mild summers, and the sun feels far more close and intense than at lower latitudes, meaning days in the high-teens can seem far warmer. To some this can also be beach-going weather. With the light blue water making the region seem almost tropical.
Making my way from the islands up to Tromsø there was a noticeable shift in vegetation once you connect to the mainland. While maintaining the peaks and toughs, the landscape becomes heavily forested, with little streams of water that flow down from the melting snow into pristine rivers and deep fjords. Travelling by bus it is unfortunately a matter of luck which side of the bus you are on to be able to take it all in – with some landscape victories and other losses.
While the landscapes are spectacular, the downside to Norway is that it is so offensively expensive that aside from sitting on a bus enjoying the scenery there is little else you can do without a significant pile of cash. Even using a reasonably strong currency like the Australian dollar the cost of daily essentials like food is close to prohibitive. My general rule that if you spend more than $20 (AUD) on a meal you’re an arsehole is impossible to maintain. Even surviving on one meal a day means becoming at best a double arsehole.
This has got me thinking about the cost of countries in relation to freedom of movement. One may have the right to travel to Norway, but given how expensive it is the country has effectively restricted travel to only those people who hold strong currencies and have a reasonable amount of savings. Or those of fabulous wealth to whom the strength of their currency is irrelevant.
Norway – along with Switzerland – are the prominent examples of Europe as an elite theme park. These are countries that may hold strong liberal values that centre freedom and equality of opportunity, but these liberal values instead come with great financial barriers. Liberalism with a steep price of admission is a contradictory and greatly diminished liberalism. Yet as global power shifts to the Indo-Pacific – and European birthrates continue to decline – becoming little more than an Instagrammable playground for the wealthy may just be how Europe reorientates itself to these new realities.
This Week’s Reading and Listening
What Is Australia’s Role In Supporting Timor-Leste?
Melissa Conley Tyler & Grant Wyeth – The Interpreter
“Of course, language learning should be considered a two-way street, and Australians working in Timor-Leste should be encouraged and supported to learn Portuguese and Tetum as a sign that Australia highly values the relationship with Timor-Leste. In the law enforcement space, for example, Australian-supported training and capacity-building programs are conducted in English, meaning they are not as effective as they could be for non-native speakers.
Beyond language education, there is scope for Australia to partner with Timor-Leste to support the country’s media ecosystem. Traditionally, Australia took a strong role in this space through international broadcasting, with the Australia Network reaching a wide range of society, including those in early education. Australia can support local media to provide content that informs and educates through the ABC’s broadcast and digital content sharing.
As with any development environment, identifying issues and binding constraints is important. Australia needs to be conscious that no partner can solve every problem and thus needs to be selective, focusing on what it can do well within its own resource constraints. In contributing to the infrastructure that supports health, such as water and sanitation, and to English language education, Australia can be an effective partner in advancing human capital in Timor-Leste.”
Why The Australian Voice Referendum Matters Globally
Ambika Vishwanath – The Interpreter
“A “No” vote from Australia would call into question the authenticity of its words and actions abroad at a time when authoritarian regimes present themselves as the vanguard of a shift away from “liberal internationalism”. It would not be the first instance of a Western nation turning its back on values presented to be universal. Sweden rescinded its Feminist Foreign Policy following 2022 elections, while the United States overturned national abortion rights and more recently eroded anti-discrimination laws. These carry reputational effects, diminishing influence.
The effects are not always obvious – countries will still turn to Washington especially as a necessary partner – but can result in greater pushback from countries such as India when questions of internal domestic issues arise. The more Western countries are seen not to follow through on the values they preach, the more pushback they will receive. And this goes beyond governments. Organisations that advocate for inclusive policies would be unable to point to Australia as an example; and genuine efforts to safeguard the rights of minority communities will face more resistance.”
Susan Neiman on Why Left ≠ Woke (audio)
Persuasion – Yasha Mounk
I have been reading some of Neiman’s work recently, but I’ve been reluctant to share it because I detest both the term “woke” and the left-right spectrum – making the title of her recent book “Left Is Not Woke” incredibly annoying. But as a succinct title designed to get attention I understand its purpose. And I think her arguments are incredibly important for understanding the era of ideological flux we are currently in.
To me, this period of ideological flux means burning the left-right spectrum to the ground and burying it deep within the earth so it may never return, however I suspect I won’t get far with this desire. Alongside this, the central operating principle of any good writer is to avoid overused terminology (especially terms that are politically charged like “woke”).
Aside from these gripes about political frameworks and language, this is an excellent discussion about the contradictory and counter-productive ideas that have overwhelmed much progressive politics. In Neiman’s words “…woke is fuelled by traditional left-wing emotions, having your empathy for people who've been marginalised, wanting to correct historical discrimination and oppression…But the woke are undermined by what are actually very reactionary theoretical assumptions.” These include the rejection of universalism in favour of tribalism, the promotion of racial essentialism, the placing of power above justice, and a deep cynicism about the possibility of progress and a dismissal of the historical progress that has been made.
The Egregious Reality of Gender Apartheid in Afghanistan
Nader Nadery - Hoover Institution
“There is a striking resemblance between the Taliban's treatment of women in Afghanistan and the actions and policies of the apartheid regime in South Africa. A comparative analysis reveals that both systems aimed to maintain domination and control over specific groups based on gender or race. The Taliban's deliberate efforts to subjugate and marginalise Afghan women mirror the apartheid regime's intent to enforce racial superiority. Additionally, both the Taliban and the apartheid regime created contexts of systematic oppression.
Firstly, the intent to maintain domination is evident in the Taliban's deliberate and sustained efforts to subjugate and marginalise Afghan women. They restrict women's mobility, education, and work opportunities in order to maintain patriarchal control and enforce a gender hierarchy that suppresses women's agency and independence.
Secondly, the context of systematic oppression is vividly present in the Taliban's policies and practices. These measures curtail women's access to education, healthcare, and participation in public life. The Taliban's rigid interpretation of Sharia law perpetuates a deeply entrenched system of gender-based discrimination, depriving women of their basic rights and freedoms.
Lastly, inhumane acts exemplify the Taliban's brutality and the suffering endured by Afghan women. Public punishments such as flogging and executions are used as tools of intimidation and control. Testimonies from Afghan women reveal harrowing accounts of physical and psychological violence, forced marriages, sexual assault, and arbitrary imprisonment of women's rights activists. The UN report on the human rights situation in Afghanistan this May recorded 332 acts of public punishment including flogging and other corporal punishments of women and men by the Taliban in six months. These acts not only violate fundamental human rights but also foster a climate of fear and subjugation.”
Scott R Stroud – Aeon
“The pragmatist commitment to philosophy as a way not just to grasp the eternal truths of the world and hold on, but instead to purposefully change or reconstruct it, struck a chord in Ambedkar. One common thread across all the disparate parts of his intellectual and practical life was the idea that he should not remain content with the world as received by him or his surrounding culture. He felt the command to change this world, and to change those that might have power over it, through his activism, his political manoeuvres, and even his impassioned speeches. The world for Ambedkar was what we could make of it, and he saw a path to reconstructing it in a more just manner that would erase the sort of hate and suffering he felt as an ‘untouchable’.
But reconstruction must aim for something. What did Ambedkar’s selective and creative pragmatism aim for as its goals or ends? What sort of moral ideals did it strive to realise? One of the recurring themes in Ambedkar’s harsh criticisms of caste throughout his life was that this graded social system suppressed the ‘human personality’ of those in ‘lower’ castes. It limited the occupations that individuals could pursue, the clothes they could wear, and even the paths they could travel, to birth status. It was at birth that one received one’s special mix of traits or potentialities from past lives, as Ambedkar saw the caste system play out in his life. He was an untouchable because of his birth placement, one that resided at the very bottom of the graded hierarchy of caste groups, and one that most other ‘higher castes’ saw as ritually polluting. There was nothing that Ambedkar could do, at least in this lifetime, that would remove the stain of untouchability in the eyes of others enraptured by these customs.
For Ambedkar, this was an affront to the worth of the individual. Drawing from Dewey’s early works – especially his essay ‘The Ethics of Democracy’ (1888) – Ambedkar came back from his education in the West and argued that caste customs hurt the ‘growth of personality’ and developed only ‘the personality of the few at the cost of the many – a result scrupulously to be avoided in the interest of Democracy.’ Each person was unique in their mix of impulses, drives and interests, and the best sort of society would help individuals create and recreate themselves with their social engagement. All he saw with caste was a restraining and limiting of what roles and talents an individual could develop. Ambedkar would often refer to his battle against the caste system – epitomised by his hatred for the practice of untouchability – as ‘a battle for the reclamation of human personality, which has been suppressed and mutilated by the Hindu social system.’ For Ambedkar, as well as for young Dewey, society worked best when it offered freedom and opportunity for each individual to develop as a valued member of a community. Democracy became the philosophy that facilitated this evolution of each person beyond strictures of separated classes or castes.”
The Wounded Jewish Psyche And The Divided Israeli Soul
Yossi Klein Halevi – The Times Of Israel
“What is being fought out in Israel today is at once a practical struggle over democratic institutions and norms, and a theological struggle over the meaning of Zionism and Jewish history. Was the purpose of Zionism to free us from the ghetto or simply to arm it? To allow our wounds to heal or to indulge them?
In effect, we are divided over two antithetical visions of redemption. Classical Zionism promised to redeem the Jews by returning them not only to the land of Israel but to the community of nations. The founders of Zionism vehemently rejected the fatalism of Balaam and believed that the destiny of the Jewish state would be inseparable from that of humanity. In stark contrast, Meir Kahane and other spiritual leaders of theological ultra-nationalism saw the Jewish state as a Divine instrument for vengeance against the gentiles.
For this camp, each terror attack becomes an unbearable reawakening of all the wounds of our history, and, no less, a violation of the dignity of the Jewish people and even of God Himself. Failure to use the full force of our power against our enemies is not merely a political failure but a spiritual sin.”
Sean Wilentz - New York Review Of Books
“Whereas McVeigh, only superficially a lone terrorist, found a kind of community in right-wing periodicals, talk radio call-ins, and far-flung gun shows, the Internet and social media have at once vastly enlarged that community and tightened its connections, with billions of unfiltered rants and orders and falsehoods flashing through the ether. McVeigh thought it would take a grandiose act of targeted terror to arouse what he only sensed was an immense army of like-minded militant patriots. Today’s extremists not only know with certainty that the army exists; they are in contact with it and are counting on its triumph, whether in the Storm or the boogaloo or some other revolutionary apocalypse. And with the Clinton assault weapons ban a distant memory, they are armed to the teeth.
But while it warns about the present danger, Homegrown also illuminates and bids us to reckon with the larger history of what happened in 1995. Not only do today’s distempers date back well before Trump or the Tea Party; they originated well before the inflamed mid-1990s, taking their modern form during the presidency of Ronald Reagan, who encouraged them with his denunciations of the federal government as a malevolent force.
And there is an even longer history behind that. The great revolutions in American history—from the nation’s founding through Emancipation, Reconstruction, the Progressive Era, and the New Deal—have been predicated on the idea, inscribed in the Constitution, that it is the nation, the more perfect Union striven for in 1787, that is best equipped to secure the common good and the general welfare. Counterrevolutionaries in their various forms—nullifiers, Confederates, Redeemers overthrowing Reconstruction, anti–New Deal Liberty Leaguers—have fought that idea, never more successfully than in the long counterrevolution begun under Reagan. Though resisted and even halted from time to time, that reaction, steadily radicalised, has now turned a substantial number of Americans against their own government, and they are ready and willing to use violence for their retribution. In the process, large and influential elements of the party of Abraham Lincoln—a party that fought against one such counterrevolution—have become captive to that subversive rage.”
Christopher R. Browning – The Atlantic
“Just as state Republicans have become more ruthlessly autocratic in their methods, a new Trump presidency would be much more efficiently goal-oriented at the federal level. A huge transformation of the administrative state is being deliberately planned. The government agencies and civil service he has decried as the “deep state” would be purged or politicised, and the “retribution” he has promised against his enemies would also be carried out. The “unitary executive” theory long promoted by some Republicans would become the reality of an unabashed authoritarianism.
The very last months of the Trump presidency foreshadowed what a second term would entail. When formerly loyal vassals such as Attorney General William Barr and Defence Secretary Mark Esper demonstrated that they would not cross the line into unconstitutional insurgency, Trump sought sycophants for whom no such line existed. In a new Trump administration, total devotion to the leader would be the sole qualification for appointment.
Unlike previous fascist leaders with their cult of war, Trump still offers appeasement to dictators abroad, but he now promises something much closer to dictatorship at home. For me, what Trump is offering for his second presidency will meet the threshold, and the label I’d choose to describe it would be “isolationist fascism.” Until now, such a concept would have been an oxymoron, a historical phenomenon without precedent. Trump continues to break every mould.”
Tomorrow’s People – Paul Morland (audio)
Mother, Maiden, Matriarch – Louise Perry
This is an excellent discussion between Perry and the demographer Paul Morland on his recent book Tomorrow’s People and the current trends in global demographics and their implications.
Why Doesn’t Gen Z Want Children?
Freya India - Unherd
“While we now enjoy more freedoms and opportunities than previous generations, delaying adulthood and focusing on ourselves also come with significant consequences. Women especially face limited choices if they wait too long to have children. But delayed adulthood also comes at a cost for young men, many of whom feel increasingly lost and depressed with modern life. Contemporary culture keeps us all straddling a strange, intermediate state in which we face the pressures of adult life but are encouraged to cling to and prolong our “selfish years” as long as possible.
Yet with record levels of mental health problems, and a deepening sense of nihilism and disillusionment, perhaps what young people need is a culture that encourages responsibility, personal sacrifice, and commitments that stretch beyond self-indulgence and endless “me time”. Notably, numerous studies show that meeting the needs of others can better fulfil our psychological wellbeing than focusing solely on ourselves.”